Who gained most from the delay on Iran’s nuclear programme?

What the Arabic-language press has to say about the nuclear talks delay, featuring Al Hayat and Asharq Al Awsat.

The seven-month extension of Iran’s nuclear talks in Vienna has generated mixed reactions in many countries about the possibility of reaching a deal, wrote Abdul Wahhab Badrakhan, in the London-based daily Al Hayat.

Unlike earlier when Iranian negotiators would cling to their nuclear programme until the last moment, this time around they rushed to call for an extension. Instead, it was the world powers, particularly the US, that bet on a last-minute breakthrough.

He wondered what had caused this role reversal, and what made Tehran look like walking away triumphant despite continuing economic sanctions. He asked whether Iranians preferred to halt talks at that point rather than make concessions that might cause division at home.

Was Iran’s move a mere attempt at evading concessions, or rather a change of tactic with a view to pursue regional escalation to push world powers to lower demands and reduce pressure?

Assuming the Iranians were ready to offer the required compromise but had not received any guarantee that the US Congress would pass the accord, the fact is that only an agreement that allows Iran to use its nuclear programme for peaceful purposes without seeking a nuclear bomb will cause sanctions to be lifted, undermining US efforts to mobilise new sanctions against Iran.

Addressing Iranians, president Hassan Rouhani said that the extension was a victory and that they would continue nuclear negotiations. Meanwhile, the extension was bad news for most countries in the region because it means the regional crisis will continue.

It is likely, the writer argued, that the failure over the nuclear negotiations was caused by disagreement over political issues.

Yet, such a reciprocal compromise might have already taken place and the extension is but an attempt to buy time to make a suitable announcement.

The extension of the Vienna talks has delayed a number of things on the regional agenda, including a de-escalation in Yemen, the election of a president in Lebanon, a national dialogue in Manama and the slowing of Baghdad opening itself up to its Arab neighbours.

Yet news of the delay was welcomed in Damascus because the Assad regime sees any nuclear deal as detrimental to its own interests.

In Israel, prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu also seemed relieved that the negotiations had failed, saying: “No deal is better than a bad deal.”

Over the decade-long nuclear talks, Iran would make up for any failed or delayed efforts to get the sanctions lifted by further escalation and interference in the Arab region. Tehran is more interested in compromising on the nuclear issue to score political gains regionally under a deal with the US.

Both John Kerry and his Iranian counterpart, Javad Zarif, have limited options for a compromise on the nuclear programme, but there is enough room to reach common ground over regional issues at the expense of Arabs, the writer said.

In an opinion article in the London-based newspaper Asharq Al Awsat, Dr Sultan Mohammed Al Nuaimi wondered whether there were any winners and losers from the extension.

He pointed out that a huge gap still exists between the two sides over contentious issues that include enrichment, the number of centrifuges, lifting of sanctions and the duration of the deal. Both Iranian and American officials seem to agree that the major goal of the talks is to reach a solid agreement.

Mr Kerry underlined what has already been achieved: Iran has reportedly halted its plan to enrich uranium to 20 per cent, its nuclear activities are under greater control and nuclear research has completely stopped.

On the other hand, the talks have spared Iran further sanctions and have seen sanctions lifted on the automobile industry and on petrochemical products. Furthermore, Iran has maintained its right to enrich uranium below five per cent, while some of its assets have been released.

It means Iran’s only benefit from the latest extension is it will get $700 million (Dh2.5 billion) a month from its funds, with the total amount standing at $4.9bn, a tiny amount for a government whose budget exceeds $220bn.

Iranian industry has been hit hard by western sanctions over the past two years, which is why the Iranian parliament reverberated with the slogan: “Death to America.”

Dr Al Nuaimi said that on balance, the P5+1 group have gained the most from the extension. However, Iran has not necessarily been defeated.

“It’s a victory with a taste of defeat”, as Tehran will get nothing further than the $700m a month in the short term.

Translated by Abdelhafid Ezzouitni